The following are excerpts of my summary of a chapter written by
USCRF Commissioner Tenzin Dorjee (2015) titled "Nonviolence and Middle Way
Approaches" (Sage handbook of conflict communication).The ideas
expressed delineate a different way of approaching negotiations that emphasizes
shared humanity, compassion, and empathetic listening of the "other.
"Nonviolence and Middle Way Approaches.
This
chapter addresses ethnocultural
conflicts, especially problematic due to their complex nature and the variety
of contributing factors, including ethnic identity, human rights, political
access, and freedom. The author focuses
on dialogue as a primary pathway for resolving this type of conflict, since
open , respectful exchanges of ideas can open doors that would otherwise remain
shut. The chapter is centered on the approaches used by the Dalai Lama, an
individual instrumental in developing a dialogic methodology termed the “middle
way approach” (MWA) used in the Sino-Tibetan conflict.
Nonviolent
approach
Nonviolent
interaction as a principle for creating stable societies is central to many
religions, including those of southern and eastern Asia. Ahisma is referenced as a central precept of this idea; while it literally
means do no harm, the implication is
more evolved and includes an active concern for the “other.” According to the Dalai Lama, an ideal
interpretation of Ahisma promotes the principles of compassion, mutual respect,
acceptance of other religions, and tolerance, all of which are crucial to
resolving conflict.
Nonviolence principles in Buddhism
Ahisma in Buddhist philosophy is rooted in the
concept that violence has many manifestations, including verbal, physical, and
mental (intention). To avoid violence means eschewing violent actions, words,
and thoughts. Motivation is a key factor in practicing the concept of Ahisma:
behaviors that stem from feelings of anger, hostility or malice are antithetical
to the ideal of nonviolence, whether they be overtly physical, or simply
verbal. On the other hand, behaviors stemming
from compassion and love are defined as nonviolent
practices and are a matter of
conscious choice.
Violence and nonviolence stem from
individual motivations and conceptual frameworks. Using this premise, a matrix
can explain four possible perspectives for viewing violence and nonviolence,
including nonviolence that is rooted in compassion and a desire for the
wellbeing of the other (some forms of peace talks), nonviolence stemming from
positive intentions but with possible
negative outcomes or behaviors (social activism), pseudo-violence, where the intentions and behaviors are not overtly
violent yet stem from malice or a violent agenda, and finally, explicitly
violent words, behaviors, and intentionality.
Pseudo-violence is especially deceptive in that it is often used to
manipulate, and while appearing peaceful, has a hidden harmful agenda. Using
motivation as a basis for defining behaviors allows for a greater depth in
understanding aspects of violence that are not immediately obvious.
Secular nature of compassion
Values such as
compassion are perceived as being rooted in religion, but are universal and
secular (not religion-based). Compassion
is a philanthropic desire to eliminate suffering in others (and the causes of
this suffering), and love is a proactive feeling of wanting happiness for
others and developing the means for ensuring it. There has been research confirming a positive
correlation between compassion, altruistic behaviors and emotional and physical
wellbeing. The Dalai Lama promotes these ideas in his work, and has authored
several texts wherein he discusses the need for integrating secular ethics into
social frameworks and creating a universal set of norms that would resolve such
issues as wealth inequality and corruption.
Acquiring
nonviolent characteristics involves developing the ability to consistently use
introspection-- honestly appraising one’s motivations and being mindful of
one’s actions. The idea is that truly positive motives will inevitably lead to
compassionate, altruistic and behaviors and words, while the opposite
correlation is also true; therefore, knowing one’s motives is essential for
understanding one’s behaviors, and monitoring these. Stanford University has initiated a center
for researching these ideas and their effects on individuals and groups, as
well as methods for cultivating these characteristics and teaching them to
others.
Middle Way
Approach
Conflict resolution takes numerous
forms and is largely rooted in the cultural frameworks of the parties engaging
in the process. Those coming from individualistic societies, whose primary foci
include self-actualization, might show a preference for a direct approach that
projects power and assertiveness. Individuals whose cultural priorities include
collective and communal concerns might favor more oblique approaches that
promote a sense of mutuality. The Middle
Way Approach (MWA) recognizes both philosophical perspectives as it assists in
developing conflict resolution solutions.
A Middle Way Approach Philosophy (MWA-P):
Between nihilism and eternalism
Two philosophical opposites
exist: that of nihilism and eternalism. Nihilism asserts that nothing has any
real meaning, whether it be negative or positive. Thus, there is no inherent
value in choosing between negative or positive; nihilism is a form of
existential vacuum. Eternalism, on the other hand, proposes that all phenomena
and beings have an inherent meaning independent of external causality and
relativity. MWA-P counters these
premises by exposing their antithetical and mutually exclusive nature.
Understanding reality, according to
this philosophical approach, entails emptying one’s self from preconceived
notions and perspectival extremes, cultivating instead a sense of discovery,
through listening, reflective thought, and meditation. The MWA approach sees
the disparity between appearances and reality, and the multiplicity of
perspectives that can be used to perceive objects and phenomena. This is a
holistic lens through which to view events, phenomena, groups, and individuals.
Both nihilism and eternalism tend to
influence the way conflicts originate and evolve, by contributing to the inevitability
of conflict, by asserting extreme perspectives and denying the validity of
opposing views. The MWA recognizes the mutability and complexity of
perceptions, avoids extremes, and focuses on finding a pathway to
reconciliation through mediation, respect, and clearly understanding that
nihilistic and eternalistic viewpoints are among the root causes of conflict.
Middle Way Approach—Based Dialogue (MWA-D)
and communication approach
There are several
fundamental aspects to resolving conflict, centering on relinquishing polarized
stances (zero-sum). Among the most important are dialogue (productive
conversations aimed at resolving issues), recognizing positive
interdependencies that exist among conflicting groups, openly discussing how to
resolve important mutual concerns, innovation and creative approaches, and
applying MWA solutions.
Dialogue
is a foundation for peaceful interactions. This refers to empathetic listening
with the objective of understanding the other. Expressed concerns are taken
seriously and never dismissed, the interaction is mutually respectful, and the
exchange is substantive, with clear objectives.
Recognizing positive interdependence between groups is another critical
aspect of conflict resolution.
Negative interdependence exists when
one group seeks to dominate the other (or others) and uses win-lose tactics and
power projection to sustain asymmetry. A suggestion to shift this imbalance is
to reframe the power relations as a form of currency to be used for mutual
benefit, and develop pathways for realizing these goals in economic, cultural
and religious domains.
Resolving mutual concerns involves
respectful acknowledgement of their validity. Here, the recommendation is to
approach these with a sense of altruism and a genuine desire to see these
resolved amicably, placing the other’s needs before one’s own, and seeking
common solutions.
Creative solutions are the best
antidote to hard line, entrenched positions, since they look at situations from
new perspectives. One approach is to examine the symbolic underpinnings of
ideological stances, and use this understanding to suggest new dynamics. This
might mean reframing a problem based on social constructions rooted in history
or culture by proposing a new institution or law that would accommodate
everyone
